The Sun. — London, England, 1864-11-24 00:00:00

7.0 7) Mr. Cobden at Rochdale, ROCHDALE, Wednesday Evening. Thre Rochdale . Reform Association, stimulated by ere recent movements of the Conservative party in the borough, held a political soiree to-night in the large machine works of Messrs. Thomas Robinson and Son, which long before the appointed hour was densely crowded in every part. It was estimated that upwards of 6,000 persons were present. Mr J. Tatham, the Mayor of Rochdale,:presided, supported by the principal gentlemen of the town connected with the Liberal party. Mr Cobden, M P. for the borough, attended, but Mr Bright, M.P,, to the great regret of his fellow-townsmen, was pre vented from being present by the recent death of a son of much future promise. Mr Cobde n , who arrived in Rochdale on the previous day, met with a very enthusiastic reception, and on taking his seat on the platform, accompanied by Mr George Wilson and Mr Jacob Bright, was loudly cheered. The CHAIRMAN briefly opened the proceedings. He expressed his gratification at the numerous at tendance, and hoped the proceedings would be con ducted withorder, although it:was possible that many on the outskirts of the crowd would be unable to hear their esteemed member, who he hoped would for many years to come represent the borough and favour them with his company on similar occasions. Itwould be presumptuous in him to detain them long but he could not help stating his satisfaction at the success which had so remarkably attended the poll. ] tical efforts of their esteemed representative. Those principles werebecoming gradually established, and but for free trade the pressure of the horrible Amee rican war and the cotton famine would have been so great that in his opinion the working classes in this country would not only not have had food to eat, but not even homes to live in. He deprecated Government interference with private enterprise in supplying the wants of the public services, and hoped that Mr. Cobden would not cease to bring the subject before the House of Commons until he had not only convinced that assembly, but had wit. nessed the vast manufacturing establishments of the Government given up. (Cheers.) Mr. Ald, ASHWORTH then proceeded to move the following resolution:—" That this meeting expresses its sincere sympathy and condolence with Mr. J. Bright, M.P., in the domestic bereavement which has prevented his attendance, assures him of the high esteem in which he is held by his fellowstowns. men, and is grateful to him for the valuable assist ance he has always so cheerfully given to the Rochdale Reform Association." He said that he sincerely regretted to have such a resolution placed in his hand. There was no man in the room, nor in the country either, who did not heartily sympa thise with its object. The event would call forth their sincere regret, but it would not fail to show how greatly Mr Bright was respected by his fellow. townsmen. It had been said that he was less re■ spected and less loved where he was best known, but it was a most malignant lie. No one dare ven ture to hazard such an assertion in Rochdale. They might regret that domestic feelings had pre. veiled over political ties, but it was a happy thing for this country that such feelings were so warmly cherished ; and he was sure that while deploring the absence of Mr. Bright, they would prefer that ho should have stayed away under such circum stances. Mr. Bright's name was indelibly asso ciated with the greatest legislative events of recent times. By the repeal of the - corn laws was effected a bloodless revolution, which had produced enor mous benefits, not only to the manufacturing dis. tricts but to the whole country. Had not the corn laws been repealed he should have regarded with the utmost dismay the crisis through which the cote ton manufacturing districts were now passing. He referred to the views of Mr Bright and Mr Cobden on the foreign relations of the country, and asserted that during the last two years the Government hal in its foreign policy paid the greatest homage to these two illustrious rr en. The greater portion of the aristocracy was ready to intervene in the American war, but Mr Bright and Mr Cobden had educated the people of this country, and they were now able to control the foreign policy of the Go vernment, and bid defiance to the influence of any oligarchy. To these two men the country owed its warmest thanks, and long after they had passed away the truth of their principles would prevail, and generations to come would bless the day when these two incomparable statesmen were known. (Cheers.) England was slowly but surely adopting their principles as its own, and he was certain that she would never desert or prove herself recreant to them. (Cheers.) Mr J. PETRIE briefly seconded the resolution, which was carried unanimously. Mr COBDEN, who was received with enthusiastic and sustained cheering, the audierce rising as he stepped to the front of the platform, said—Mr Mayor, ladies, and gentlemen, before I commence the few remarks I have to offer, I must be per. mated to declare my profound sympathy with the expression of condolence which you have just offered to my esteemed friend and your absent and bereaved neighbour—a feeling which I know is felt by thou. • eands here tcsnight, and which will be shared by millions in all parts of the world. (Hear, hear.) May he be consoled by a consciousness of the deep sympathy and sorrow with which his aftLetion will be everywhere received. (Hear.) Nor can I allow this occasion to pass without a reference to a blank in our ranks upon the platform to-night. I have never before attended a meeting in Roch dale at which our lamented friend Alderman Livesey was not present. By his death the most numerous portion of the community of Rochdale has lost an amiable neighbour, and in many cases a powerful protector and advocate. I believe all classes and all parties will concur in inscribing this epitaph on his monument, v;z., that he was an honest, con sistent politician, an earnest and true friend. (Hear, hear.) Now, gentlemen, when I see before me this vast assembly, the largest meeting on one floor I have ever had the honour of attending, I regret that 1. may perhaps be unable to make you all hear what I have to say ; but if those of you who are on the outside will have the patience to practise a little of that non-intervention of which Mr Ashworth has spoken—l mean with your elbows and toes—(laughter)—l will endeavour to reach the ears of all present. In coming before you in pur suance of that good custom of a representative visit• lug his constituents at least once a year, it is not much my custom, as you know, to recapitulate what has occurred in the preceding session of Parliament. I have generally taken it for granted that you have been paying attention to what has passed, and that you do not require any retrospective review of event?. I am, now, however, disposed to make an exception from that rule, and to offer the few re marks on what happened during the last session, in order to illustrate and enforce the question of non-intervention, and to show you how, in my opinion, the proceedings of the session have led to a complete revolution in our foreign policy , and have put an impassable gulf between the old traditions of the Foreign Office and the principles which I hope to see adopted in the conduct of our foreign affairs. During the thirty years since I first, by pen or voice, gave utterance to my sentiments in public, I have always attached the utmost importance to the principle of non-intervention in the concerns of other nations. (Hear, hear.) I have looked upon it, indeed, as a fundamental article in the creed of this country, if we would eithe r secure good government at home or preserve ourselves f rom en dl ess em b arrassment or complications abroad. You may remember when last I addressed you how I complained of the con stant violation of that principle, and how I com pared the state of the country, always looking after the affairs of foreign co untries, to what would b e the case in Rochdale if your town cuneil were en. gaged in managing the affairs of Leeds or Black burn instead of attending to their own business. (Hear, hear.) Well, when we met last session, the Queen's speech announced the impending negat e . tions respecting Schleswig cud Holstein. From the opening debate on the Queen's speech down to the end of June, which was particularly the close of the session, I may say, without any exception, the whole attention of Parliament, as far as the action of the two great parties who contend - for power and place are concerned, was given to this question of Schleswigellolstein. I am not going into the history of that most complicated of all clues• tions further than this, that in'llBs2, through the mischievous activity of our Foreign Office, seven diplomatists were brought round a green table in London to settle the destinies of a million of people in the two provinces of Schleswig.Holstein, with. out the slightest reference to the wants or wishes I or tendencies or interests of the people. The pre amble of the treaty there and then agreed to stated that what the diplomatists were going to do was with the view of maintaining the integrity of the Danish monarchy and the balance of power in Eu. rope. Kings, Emperors, and Princes were repre sented at that meeting. The people had not the least voice or weight :in the matter. A treaty was settled, the object of which was to draw closer these two provinces and Denmark. The ten. dency of the great majority of the people of the pro. vinces, about a million in all, being altogether in the direction of Germany, from that time to this year that treaty was followed by constant agitation and discord. A couple of wars sprung out of it, and the upshot of it is that it has been torn to pieces by two of the Governments who were parties to it. That is a summary of the proceedings, and I do not mean to go further into it. During the whole of last session the time of the House of Commons was occupied by this question. If you turn to the volumes of Hansard which record what passed, you will find in the index, under the head of Schleswig- Holstein, or Denmark, or Germany, reference to page after page devoted to this subject—questions put to the Government as to when the Blue-book would be laid on the table, when the Conference would meet in London, when the protocols would be submitted to Parliament, and so on. In this way the two great parties spent the whole of the session, and when they were set talking on this matter they made want of papers, or the absence of a decision on the part of the Conference, an excuse for doing nothing else. We had great debates in the house, and you will find that some of our most prominent members, the men who do the chief work inthe great party battles, hardly opened their lips about any. thing but Schleswig-Holstein. The House of Lords was still more animated. I have observed that if ever there is anything connected with an exciting foreign topic, anything likely to lead to an excuse for naval or military expeditions, the House of Loads becomes more excited than the House of Commons ; but you never see the Lords lose their calmness or self-possession on any domestic clues. tion. (Laughter and hear.) There was one noble peer who spoke repeatedly on this question, and who seems to me to be peculiarly framed for illus. trating the fact that a man may hays oratorical gifts and yet be destitute of common sense or ordinary judgment. (Laughter.) This noble lord in the early part of the session in a speech on this subject assailed the Queen for having influenced her Ministers in the interests of Germany. We are not a republic in this country, but the Queen. as long as she ac cepts a Prime Minister dictated to her by the House of Commons, has no political power, and therefore can have no political responsibility. (Hear, hear.) That our present Sovereign accepts her Prime Mi. nisters on these grounds and no other, we have good reason to know—(hear, hear)—but what shall we say of the chivalrous assembly which allowed a per. son to be assailed in her absence. The only person in the country who was defenceless—and that per son a lady ! (Hear.) With the exception of Earl Russell,who spoke in defence of himself rather than . of the Queen, no one rose to rebuke the noble lord for his attack on her Majesty. Later in the session we heard more from this noble lord, who claims for himself the merit of having involved us in the Cri mean war, of having been its foremost advocate, and who has always been a great supporter of for tifications and every other abomination of modern times. Having begun the session by attacking the Sovereign it was only perhaps consistent that he should end by vituperating the whole people. The noble lord used these words when speaking on the Danish question in July :—" I appealed to the higher and nobler feelings of Parliament and the natinn—believing, as I did, that a course which was directed by generosity would also be recommended by policy. Others, with more success, appealed to more common things—to lave of repose, to love of quiet, but above all to the love of money, which has now become the engrossing passion of the people of this country." If I were going to call a witness to prove that the English people are in pecu niary affairs chivalrously generous, almost foolishly generous. For instance, they can give en annual allowance of £7,700 to an individual who has no moral claim, and certainly no legal right to it that would be recognised in any other country—l would call as my witness no other than this very peer, the Earl of Ellenborough. (Hear, hear.) But what I wish to call attention to is what passed at the close of these debates. The newspapers which were in the interest of the Government were writing in favour of war to the lest moment, full of large leading articles. Some of them even announced the very numbers of the regiments, the names of the colonels, the names of the ships, and their com manders, that were to be sent to fight the battles of Denmark ; and in the House of Commons there was a general opinion that there was a great struggle going on in the Cabinet as to whether we should declare war against Germany. At the end of June the Prime Minister announced that he was about to produce the protocols, and state the decision of the Government on the question. Ho gave a week's notice of that intention; and then I witnessed what has convinced me that we have achieved a revolue tion in our foreign policy. Tho whippers-in--I sup• pose you know who I mean ? the men who on each side of the house take stock of the number and opi nions of their respective followers—were during that eventful week sounding the views of members, and there came up from the country such a manifes tation of opinion against the war that, day after day, one member after another representing large constituencies went to those who acted for the Go vernment in Parliament and told them distinctly that the nation would allow no war for any such matter as Schleswig-Holstein. (Hear.) There came surging up from the great seats and centres of manu factures and commercial activity one'unanimous veto against a war against Schleswig.Holstein. The con versation which passed in these gossipping purlieus of the House of Commons—the library, the tea, and smoking rooms—was most interesting and striking. A man representing a great constituency would be asked,' Well, how is it that the newspapers are all writing for war ?" The reply would be, " Oh, the newspapers in London, which are in the interest of Government, are publishing leading articles in fa your of war ; but they are expressing only their own opinions, and not the opinions one heard on 'Change." By the end of the week preceding the Ministerial statement there was such a manifesta tion of public opinion that I was satisfied that whatever the papers said, that whatever was the opinion of the Cabinet at the moment, no Go vernment could get into a war while the Parlia. ment was sitting. When the subsequent debate came on I spoke on the subject. I challenged the house to say whether I was speaking incorrectly when I declared that there were not five men in it who would vote for a war in connexion with any question at issue in regard to Schleswig-Holstein ; and nobody contradicted me. (Hear, hear.) The feeling out of doors in London at this time was one of intense excitement. I never saw the House of Commons, even in the days of the Corn-laws, so mobbed by what I heard called a middle-class mob, as when Lord Palmerston came down to make his final declaration of the decision of the Government. It was evident that among the middle classes of London there was an impression that peace or war was hanging in the balance, and they were rather apprehensive lest war should be the decision of the Government. This placed Parliament;the governor of the nation—which was to some extent repro. nted by it—in a somewhat ignominious position ; and the natural solution, according to our consti tutional way of doing things, was this,—that the nation must find a vicarious sufferer who should be made to pay the penalty of this national blunder. The Opposition in the House of Commons is the proper medium through which con stitutional process shouldbecartrhiee necessary dout. In an cient times, you know, a Minister who got his country into a mess had his head cut off • nowa days he is de ca pi tate d i n another way—he is sent away from Downing street into the cold shade of THE SUN, LONDON, THURSDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 24, 1864. the Opposition, on the left hand of the Speaker. Oa this occasion the Opposition brought for. ward a motion condemnatory of the Government, which they had no right to do, because they were really more to blame for the delusion that had been produced in the country than the Government. The Opposition was continually stimulating the Government to do something, or making them re• sponsible for entertaining something, and putting grave questions to them, keeping their countenances while they did so, and not leading us to suppose that it was all a joke; therefore, when they had been thus parties to the wasting of the session, they could not, logically or consistently, condemn the Government. Mr. Kinglake, who had never been in favour of the proceedings in regard to Schles wig-Holstein, substituted a passage in the resolu tion, which neither absolved nor condemned the Government, but merely expressed satisfaction that we had escaped war ; and there the matter ended. But now let me tell the solid, substantial manatee. taring and commercial capitalists of the country that this is not a very honourable position to be left in. They allowed the Government to go on, and commit themselves in encouraging a small Power to fight with a big one. It was very much like a man backing a little fellow for a prize fight, drawing him to the scratch where his toe is to come, telling him how to plant himself, superintending his train ing, and assuming responsibility for all he does, and then, as soon as blows are exchanged, running off. (Hear, hear.) This is the position in which we were left by what happened last session in re gard to Schleswig-Holstein, and we are caricatured in every country of Europe. I myself saw German and French caricatures immediately afterwards. There was a French one representing Britannia with a cotton night.cap on, (Laughter.) I recol lect a German picture of the British Lion running off as hard as he could pursued by a hare. (Laughter.) That is not a satisfactory state of things, because I maintain that to a great extent we deserve all this ; that is, we deserve it unless we show that we did not run away merely because it did not suit us to fight, but that we intended to adopt a new principle in our foreign policy,and that other countries must not expect us to fight except for our own business. (Hear.) The manufacturing and commercial interests of the country were in a state of almost unparalleled expansion. Vast en. gegements had been entered into in the belief that they would be fulfilled in time of peace. Both capitalists and labourers felt if war had arisen just then it would have produced enormous calamities, such as no nation ought ever to bring on itself ex cept in defence of its vital interest and honour. (Hear, hear.) But all that was a subject to have been foreseen and anticipated, if not by Govern ment, who are living in the traditions of 50 years ago, by active public spirit on the part of the people. You cannot separate yourselves from the honour or dishonour of governments, from the acts of your cabinets and legislatures, whom you leave to act in your behalf or in your name. This I will tell, you what appears to me to have been the result of a week's debate on the Schleswig Holstein qaeetion. Both sides felt they were parties to such a hideous fiasco, that they were in such an ignominious plight, that as representatives of this great nation they had so compromised themselves, that there was a general disposition to take the pledge of non-in tervention. (Cheers and laughter.) But you know that when people get a headache after a debauch they sometimes take the pledge to teetotallers, but they do not keep it. Now what I want to do is to prevent the recurrence of that disgraceful proceed. ing which wasted you the last session of Parlia. ment, and ended by making you as a nation, as far as a Cabinet can make it ridiculous, Well I thought we had made some progress through the declara tion of sentiment from the leading men on all sides of the House of Commons, But what did you hear ? —what did you see ? I have seen the report of a speech recently made by an honourable and respec. table gentleman to a constituency—a manufactur ing constituency—whose good voices and support he is endeavouring to obtain at the next election— a manufacturing borough that shall be nameless, further than that it is on the banks of the Roche. (Loud laughter.) The hon. and learned gentleman, addressing this manufacturing constituency, is said to have been received with immense applause. He has a long programme of foreign policy, which, if it be carried out, and adopted by a manufacturing community, I think we ought to reckon on being at war every year of our lives, and instead of spend ing twenty-five millions for such services, we ought to begin by spending 50 millions. It is said we must form our armaments on a new scale, in order to prevent Franco from swallowing up Ger many. Now, I think if France were to perform such a feat as that, she would suffer terribly from indigestion. (Loud laughter.) After swallowing these 40 millions of uncJmfort ;bin Teutons, I think she would be an object of pity rather than terror ever afterwards. (Loud laughter.) Well, now, really it is surprising to hear men aspiring to be statesmen come and talk exactly as if they had taken passages from " Baron Munchausen" and " Gulliver's Travels," How can we possibly say that we have made any great progress if such senti ments can be paraded in a manufacturing body on the banks of the Roche ? and what must we expect to hear from the agricultural districts in the neigh bourhood of Midhurst ? (Continued laughter.) A speech has recently been made by my right hon. friend (Mr. Bouverie) at Kilmarnock, and there seemed to be some parties who are generally rather acute sitting on the platform near him, and he gave utterances to some opinions that rather tended to show that, in spite of the concessions of the last session, we shall have to do with the policy of in• tervention what we did with respect to the corn question. (Cheers.) We shall have to reiterate, and repeat, and repeat, as Mr. O'Connell once said, "I always go on repeating until I hear what I am saying coming back to mo in echoes from other people." (Hear.) Now my friend Mr. Bouverie speaks in favour of a foreign policy which should be founded upon a benevolent, sentimental principle —that we should do what is right, true, and just to all the world. I think, as a corporate body, as a political community, if we can manage to do what is sight and true and just to each other—if we can manage to carry out that principle at home it will be about as much as we can do. (Hear.) I do not think I am responsible for seeing what is right and just done carried out all over the world. If we had the responsibility I think Providence would invest us with more power. We cannot do it, and there is an end of the matter. My right hon. friend, when he advocates the carrying out of the senti mental policy, carries us as far back as the time of Queen Elizabeth, and says that she was a Sove reign who did what was right and true and just, and in the interest of Protestantism all over the conti. nent of Europe. Now, I think he could not have selected a more unhappy example, for if ever there was a hard headed and not soft hearted Sovereign —if ever there was a place where there was little of that romantic sentiment of going abroad to do right and justice to other people, I think it was in the Tudor breast of that good Queen Bess, as she is called. (Hear, and laughter.) When I read "Mot.. ley's History of the Dutch Republic"—when I read this history of the rise of the Netherlands, and when I see how that struggling community, with their whole country desolated by Spanish bigctry, and every town lit up daily by the fires of persecutors-- when I look at what passes when the envoys come to Queen Elizabeth to ask for aid, how she is huck stering for money while they are talking of religion, I declare,with all my doctrines of non-in tervention,l am almost ashamed of Queen Bess and her grasping Ministers Burleigh and Walsingharn. They carried out what they considered a British policy with a degree of selfishness amounting to downright ava rice. My right hon. friend next quotes Lord Chat. ham. Now do you suppose that Lord Chatham was running about in the world protecting and looking after other peoplos affairs ? Why he went abroad in the spirit of a commercial traveller more than any Minister we ever had. Just drop into the Guildhall in the metropolis and read the inscriptions recorded by the city of London to the memory of Lord Chat ham. They state it to be a recognition of the bane. fits which the city of London received by her ample share in the general prosperity, and then they go on to describe by what means that great man had made them so prosperous-114 1 " by conquests made by arms and generosity in every part of the globe, and by commerce for the first time united with and made to flourish by war." Well they were living under a different dispensation from our own. At that time Lord Chatham thought that by making war on France and seizing the Canadas he was bring ing custom to the English merchant and manufac turer, and he publicly declared that he made these conquests for the very purpose of having monopolies of these markets, and he would not allow a colonist to manufacture a horseshoe for himself. That was a time when the people believed that the only way to flourish in trade was to establish a monopoly, and that blood and violence would lead to profit. We know that that is no longer the case. (Hear, hear.) If you take his great son—if you take the second Pitt—when he began war he began the conquest of colonies. He went to war with France in 1793, and for three or four years afterwards he was employed in seizing islands in the West Indies. Whether , to Holland, or to Den. they belonged to France mark, he believed that such a course of proceeding would render war profitable. We live in a time when it is utterly impossible for Englishmen ever to make war profitable. What we want in states manship is this—that we should know what are the interests of our days with our better lights and knowledge, and not be guided by the maxims and rules which appertain to a totally different state of things; and no statesman ever did succeed unless he was carrying out a policy that was suited to the times in which he lived and in which he wrought up to the highest lights of the age in which he fleurished. That is the only way in which a states. man can distinguish himself, and I have no hesita tion in saying that any modern statesman who is trusting for favour or future honours to anything that has been done in foreign policy during the last 30 or 40 years will most miserably be forgotten, and will only be remembered to be avoided within two years after his death. (Cheers.) Now I am going to touch on a very delicate question. It is not enough that the Government should not interfere in foreign questions. It is not enough that the Government should not lecture foreign countries as to what policy they should pursue; there is something else required. Englishmen, through their public speakers and their press, may learn toareat foreign nations in a different spirit than they have hitherto done, and they must learn to do it as a point of honour to other countries, as well as from a sense of self-respect of what is due to themselves. You mislead foreign countries by your futile demonstrations of opinion which are not to be followed by acts, and instead of belie• filing other nations, you often injure them with the best possible intentions on your part. There is nothing that my friend Mr. Bright and myself have more avoided than public demonstrations in favour of some nationality or people abroad. Nothing would have been easier for us to have gone down to Guildhall and to have gained immense applause and popularity by making declamatory speeches in favour of Poland or Hungary, or some oppressed nationality. I have, however, always felt that in doing this we were likely to do a great deal of harm to those with whom we sympathised. I hope no one supposes that we have less sympathy for other people than those gentlemen who are accustomed to speak at those meetings, or who write in the newspapers on behalf of foreign nationalities. But I maintain that a man is better doing his duty to his country who is engaged in extending aid to re• ligious and commercial liberty than he is speaking and writing on behalf of other people all over the world. But see what mischief you may do. I have no hesitation in saying—and I speak on the autho rity of parties themselves deeply interested in this matter, who have been the victims of what has been done in London and Paris last year on the subject of Poland, which has led thousands of the generous youth of Poland to a premature grave, thousands more to Siberian exile—it was the manifestations and instigations of London and Paris that precipi tated the insurrection—if it can be called one at all —in Poland last year. It never had a chance from the beginning—it was never shared in by the mass , of the people; and I am told from the best authority that the class of nobles or proprietors in Poland, from whom all previous efforts for national eman. cipation have proceeded, have been utterly annihi la!ed by this last abortive effort. It is futile to expect another effort from this class; but God, in his own good time, may raise up another class of peasant prorr:etors who, inspired by motives of religion or patriotism, may again take the field ; but at present the . Polish nation is practically hors do combat. I saw reports of a meeting held in Guildhall on behalf of Poland, but I have travelled abroad, and I know what exagge rated ideas aro attached to such meetings in Guildhall, with the Lord Mayor in the chair, with peers and members of Parliament present. You may say that you only mean moral forc e ; b u t y ou cannot persude people abroad th at meet i ngs so he l d, and so attended, had co other object, and that Eng. land did not intend to give material aid to that re volution. (Hear, hear.) In the case of Schleswig- Holstein, there is no doubt that the English Gevern ment encouraged that small country Denmark to resistance, and that she expected we should come to help her. But this is not the only mischief we do. The moment that another nation appears in the field you excite far more resentment and stimulate to greater efforts the Governments engaged in put ting down these rebellions. I have no hesitation in saying that these movements in England did more to consolidate the power of the Russian empire than anything else, for at that time it was in danger of being thrown into confusion by the emancipation of the serfs. Directly France and England began to direct despatches to the European Governments it made an appeal to the peopl©, not so much against the Poles, as to resist any attempt of the Western Powers to dictate to Russia ; and it was thus enabled to call forth the patriotism of its people, and to go to an expense against Poland which it would not have ventured to have done ex cept under the assumption that it might have to go to war with France and England. I say that these considerations ought to make the best intentioned people in the world pause before they join in de monstrations of this kind. You must not only dis courage the Government from taking proceedings, but you must do nothing to mislead people abroad, or stimulate those Governments to increase their efforts against their own populations. (Cheers.) If I would only flatter you instead of talking these home thrusts, I believe I might be Prime Minister. It' I would say that you are the wisest, the best, and the happiest people in the whole world, I have no doubt that I might be Prime Minister. I have seen in my experience Prime Ministers made by this process. (Ch eer s.) It is not my custom to court momen t ar y p o pularity ; but I always gat it back with exorbitant and even usurious interest far more than I deserve. (No, no.) The highest people have a peculiar way of dealing with foreign questions. We are the only people in the whole world that make foreign topics mat. ters of passionate earnes t internal politics. You never see in Fra nce or Germany, or in America, the newspapers taking up foreign questions and attack. ing each other b ecause they are not of the same opinions. I have h a d a m essage from a gentleman in this town stating that he would not vote for me because I did not entertain the same opinions as he did on the American war. (A laugh.) I said in reply that I did not profess to dictate to others on a matter of such pure abstraction as that; but I wanted to know who made him my political Pope. (Cheers.) If we are to discuss these foreign ques tions at all, let us do so calmly and temperately, as I now mean to do the subject of the American war. (Cheers.) I wish to be tolerant towards every body who differs from me about this dreadful civil war in America. I have most intimate friends who differ totally from me on this question ; it never drove me from their doors nor prevented me from associating with them. Nay, more, I had always said, that whilst I holey() many entertain sinister views on this question,there are, on the other hand, many who have taken the part of the South be cause it is the weaker, because it is insurgent, and because, looking at the extent of territory, they do not believe that the North can succeed in subduing it, and that as the struggle is a hopeless one we ought to endeavour to put an end to it. These are views that ought to be regarded with deference— but there are other parties in the country who have not had the sense to conceal their objects, but who wish to see an end put to republican institutions in that country. I will tell you what my opinion is with regard to Republicanism. I think we may have greater advantages in this country with a hereditary monarchy than we might have from electing a president every four or every six years. Now this is my theory—but, at the same time, if I see a people setting up a government upon a standard very far in advance of anything that was ever known in the world before, a people who say, "We will rule ourselves by pure reason—there shall be no re ligious establishments to guide or control us — there shall be no born rank of any kind, but every honour held and every promotion enjoyed shall spring from the people and by selection—we main. tain that we can govern ourselves without the insti tution of any hierarchy or privileged body what ever"—l think everybody will admit that at all events that programme is founded upon an die. vated conception of what humanity is capable of. (Cheers.) It may be a mistaken estimate—it may fail, but do not ask me—who always consult to the best of my ability the interests of the great masses of my kind—do not ask me to wish it may fail— do not ask me to exult if it seems to fail—because I utterly repudiate the possibility of my partaking any such sentiment es that. (Hear, hear.) We have lately seen that great country brought into a strait and a difficulty which we might be thrown into tomorrow. We are now ruling India, con taining a population of 130,000,000 or 140,000,000 of people for the sake of their custom—and for nos thing else ; for I can defy you to show that this nation has any interest in that country except for the commerce that is carried on—that is au adven ture unconnected with free trade. You might have something happen out there at any time—you might have something happen in Ireland. Is it conservative to jump up immediately that this great republic falls into this civil wer from the fault of no one living, but to trace out the first cause rather to the British nation and to the British Court some 150 years ago—l ask, is it conservative in this country, or among the religious classes of Europe, that they should have jumped so hastily into this kind of partnership with this insurrection ? (Hear, hear.) Now let us see what it is. Here you have a great political description, in which the active parties, who are very able men—l know the leaders on both sides—and what were they doing ? They knew the tremendous consequence of the course they were going to entail upon this cotton region. For instance, here is a disruption by which they were to throw into convulsion this populous district,w here many wear a paler brow than they would have done but for this civil war. Now what did they do to justify themselves in the eyes of foreign States? to induce us and other countries to recognise them as belligerents ? In our political convulsions you may remember that the parties who have sought to create a disruption tending to shake the commu. nity, and cause loss and inconvenience abroad, have always put out, from respect for the world, a pro gramme of their grievances. But where is there any programme in this case ? In the case of our civil war after Crom well and his Parliament had deposed and decapitated Charlesl., they put out a programme of grievances, which they published in three lan guages and circulated throughout all Europe, show. ing why they had deposed the King and why they had established the Commonwealth. (Hear.) What happened when James 11. was dethroned and Wil liam 111. was invited over ? A declaration of rights was published, a narrative of the grievances against James 11., and the programme included the condi tion required from the succeeding King. (Hear.) What did the Americans do when they declared their independence in 1776? They put forth a decla ration of grievances—and at the present time no Englishman can doubt that they were justified in separating from the mother country—(cheers)— though they were in the beginning of far more gigantic proportions than all those to which I have alluded, which the parties knew would convulse I this peaceful district. Have they put forth any pro gramme ? I know the men, and I know that no one is more competent to write such a programme than Jeff. Davis. He could write it out as well as Thomas Jefferson and the declaration of 1776. But why is there no such declaration ? Because they have but one grievance—they want to consolidate, perpee tuate, and extend slavery, but they cannot do it. (Loud and repeated cheers.) Bat instead of taking a straightforward course, what do they constantly say ? These eminent men—eminent, I mean, for their intellect—who would so well state their case if they dared to speak the truth, what do they say ? Leave us alone—all we want is to be left alone, That is the reason why the conservative Govern ments of Europe, and so large a portion of the upper classes is England, have consented to back the insurrection. Now, how would they feel if Essex and Kent, having been beaten on the subject of the corn laws, had chosen to set up Kent and Essex as East Anglia, right across the Thames, as the secessionists have sought to attempt to cut off Louisiana and the morah of the Mississippi, and if they had said, "we want to be left alone." (Hear, hear.) Why, can any Government be carried on if a section of the people when they aro beaten at the poll at a peaceful election be allowed to secede ? I ask, where is the conservatism among the governing class of the country? I come to the conclusion, that after all there is more conservatism among the democracy, (Loud cheers.) We have heard news - from America lately which I confess has struck me as being one of the most sublime spectacles in the whole history of the world. You have 23 millions or 24 millions of people spreading over territories some thousands of miles square, exercising on ono day the right of sufferance upon a question respecting which cur rents of blood are flowing. And you see the result of that peaceful election, given without so much tumult as I have seen in that dirty little village of Calne, or that little town Kidderminster. (Laughter.) That is an event that humanity may be proud of, and it is not the subject for the political party to exult over or scowl over. (Cheers.) A people who can do that have given to the world a spectacle such as was never before presented by any other people, and what have they done ? They have decided after years of war, and after almost every household has lost a relative or an inmate, the contest that arose between General M'Clellan, who desires to put down the war without making the abolition of slavery a condition, whilst Mr Lincoln desires to put down the war and extirpate slavery from the South. (Cheers.) Notwith standing that that was the appeal made to the whole people, they have preferred acti-ng in the interests of humanity, for that can no longer be questioned—they have preferred the continuance of war rather than the continu ance of degreding slavery. (Loud cheers.) Let us have no more of the late talk that this is not a war to put down slavery. Everybody now admits that, whatever is the issue of the struggle, slavery will be abolished. Now, with regard to the issue itself, I told you two years ago that I did not believe that I should live to see two independent States on that continent of North America. I have repeated that assertion since, and I now come to confirm that opinion, but with far more emphasis than I have ever expressed be fore. (Cheers.) I do not believe that that country, in my day, will ever be separated. I look upon the geographical difficulties in the way of separation to be absolutely insur mountable. (Cheers.) Take the case of the Mississippi ; that river, with its tributaries, flows through 20,000 miles of navigable waters into the Gulf of Mexico, and in order that the United States might have its mouths in their own occu pation, that they might, as it were, have the keys of their I own doors in their own pockets, they purchased from the First Napoleon the State of Louisiana with the money of the old Union for three millions sterling, (Hear.) Well, now, some two or time hundred thousand people could have squatted there. Some English, some French, and some Americans have taken into their heads that they will carry off this State, and place the mouths of that great river, the outlet of this vast country, in the hands of a foreign State. I have said it would be far easier for Essex and Kent to carry off the mouths of the Thames, and sot up an East Anglian Kingdom, than for Louisiana to carry off the mouths of the Mississippi and set up for an independent state. Thera aro some few hundreds of thousands in the counties of Kent and Essex, but the valley of the Mississipi will become the home of 200,000,000, and this makes it in finitely more impossible that the United States should allow the mouths of the Mississippi to be carried off than that England should suffer the mouths of the Thames to be taken away. Wby should they do so when they can prevent it and by the smallest expense retain possession of it, for a few gun boats could easily blockade the outlets of that river ? Even if the North cannot conquer Louisiana they might cut the dykes above New Orleans and dry up that State, In saying this 1 am speaking of the motives and possibilities and not of wishes or feelings of my own. (Cheers.) If you think that Mr Jefferson Davis would be contented with the Cotton States and not be allowed to extend into Texas, he would not thank you. They are fighting in the South to carry slavery beyond Texas into the vast regions of Central America. Now, I say, that if the geographical features of the country had been looked at by the ruling classes and those who write in the newspapers, they would not have arrived at a conviction of the success of the Southern side. There is a newspaper in London read by everybody, but I have marvelled at the opinion which it has betrayed of the geographical features of this territory. In one article recently there was a river of 580 miles of internal navigation, to which the largest river in this country is a mere rivulet, and it was made to turn, up hill any number of mike into another river, and these two cemented were made to fall into a third river, into which neither really pours a drop of water. (Hear, hear.) Now there is a real danger in the ignorance of what, for want of a better term, I may call the ruling classes of this country—there is a real danger from their total ignorance of everything relating to America, and you may get into difficulties from this ignorance which may cost much national dishonour to escape from. (Cheers.) If I were a rich man I would endow a professor's chair at Ox ford and Cambridge to instruct the undergraduates of those universities in American history. I will undertake to say, and I speak advisedly, that I will take any undergraduate now at Oxford or Cambridge, and I will bring him to a map of the United States and ask him to put his finger on Chi cago, and I will undertake to say that he does not go within a thousand miles of it. Yet Chicago is a place of 150,000 inhabitants, from which one or two millions of people in our country are annually fed. These young gentlemen know all about the geography of ancient Greece and Egypt. Now, I know I shall be pelted with Greek and Latin quctations for what I am going to say. When I was at Athens I sallied out one summer morning to seek the famous river, the Ilissus, and after walking some hundred yards or so up what ap peared to be the bed of a mountain torrent, I came upon a number of Athenian laundresses, and found that they had dammed up this famous classical river, and were using every drop of its water for their own sanatory pur poses. Why then should not these young gentlemen who know all about the geography of the Ilissus, know also some thing about the geography of the Mississippi. I am a great advocate of culture of every kind, and I say when I find a man like Professor Goldwin Smith or Professor Rogers, who, in addition to profound classical learning, have a vast knowledge of modern affairs, and who as well as scholars are thinkers. These are men whom I know to have a vast supe riority over me, and I bow to them with reverence for their superior advantages; but to bring young men from college, with no knowledge of the country in which the great drama of modern politics and national life is now being worked out, who are ignorant of a country like America, but who whether it be for good or for evil, must exercise more in fluence in this country than any other class—to bring up the young destitute of such knowledge, and to place them in responsible positions in the Government is, I say, imperil ling its best interests, an earnest remonstrance ought to be made against such a state of education by every public man who values in the slightest degree the future welfare of his country. (Hear.) You now know my opinions with re spect to the future of America. I do not desire to carry them out, and I should not have said so much if so much had not been said on the other side. I want nothing but neutrality—(cheers)—but if we are to have perfect neutra lity:on this subject, let us try, for Heaven's sake, to have a little temper in the discussion of a question for which,happily for us, we are not responsible. I am mute and silenced when I recollect that I have been protesting against war ever since I came into public life, but I have never suc• ceeded in preventing wars all over the world. I could not say to America—Why do you insist on carrying on this civil war ? I should at once be subject to the reply— Why do you not take the beam out of your own eye before you take the mote out of ours ? But I fear that the ad'• vocates of all the wars against which I have always been vainly protesting are now turning up the whites of their eyes, as if they had been Quakers from their birth. Now, gentlemen, I have done with foreign policy, and I have only spoken so much concerning non .interven tion because I wish to have less to say about it in future, when I hope we shall be allowed to attend to our own affairs, (Hrar.) I am happy to be able to fortify myself by a quo tation of a very sound doctrine from a very orthodox source. A wrher in the Edinburgh Review of last month thus de fines the views of foreign policy which have now been accepted by Parliament and the majority of the nation as to our rela tions with the Continental Powers of Europe--" That this country shall enter into no official discussion and no public engagements on affairs remotely concerning herself—that she will reserve her power and influence for British pur poses—that she will not pronounce an opinion unless she is resolved to support it by action—and that she will throw on other States the whole responsibility of acts affecting them selves more directly than they affect us." That is unques■ tionably a sound and wise doctrine, and the wonder is how anybody should ever have disputed it. The adoption now, however, is rather like taking the pledge after the headache. (Laughter.) I am glad also to have the opportunity of quoting the same orthodox publication on another most important matter. Speaking of domestic reforms that await our attention, the reviewer say—" At home we have still to apply to land and to labour that freedom which has worked more marvels in the case of capital and commerce." Now, that is not my language; it is that of the Whig reviewers, but I say Amen to it. However, if I had 25 or 30 years, instead of twice that number, I would take Adam Smith in my hand, and I would have a league for free trade in land just as we had a league for free trade in corn. There is just the same authority iu Adam Smith for the ono as for the other ; and if the matter were only properly taken up, not as a revolutionary Chartist notion. but as a step in political economy, I believe success would attend the effort —(hear)—and I say this, that the man who can secure the application of free trade to land and to labour will do for the English poor more than we have been able to do by the application of free trade to commerce. Besides the question of Parliamentary reform, which lies at the bottom of most things, there is something which must be done next year in the way of revising our financial position—and this will_follow very much as a corollary to our new foreign po licy, and as an illustration of the fruits which may be reaped from its adoption. If you avow the principle that your not going to fight for anything but your own inte rests and honour, nor the honour of the barrack room, but the honour of the great Christian country which need never under a wise Government be dissociated from its inte rests, I say if you acknowledge that rule, I defy you to find a necessity for keeping up your present military establish ment and spending twenty-five millions a year on the army and navy. Already I see it announced in an autho ritative quarter that there is to be a reduction next year, and I am glad of it very much for the sake of the Chan• cellor of the Exchequer. (Hear.) Mr Gladstone is the best Chancellor of the Exchequer that England has ever had—(cheers)—and I do not hesitate to say so, recollecting that among his predecessors was "William Pitt. I am sorry, however, to add that Mr Gladstone has been the most extravagant Chancellor who ever managed the Trea sury. He has proved himself a master in adjusting the bur dens of the country—l mean that he found the weight placed on the animal in such a way as to render it most difficult for him to carry it—the burden was tied round his knees—it was fastened to his tail—(laughter)—it hung over his eyes, it blinded him, impeded his movement, and lamed him at every step. Then came Mr Gladstone and released the fettered limbs, placing the burden most inge niously on the softest possible pad on the animal's shoulders. But we must not forget that the beast is still carrying the burden, and a great deal more than he had to bear before this beautiful process was commenced. We never had a Government which extracted from the coun try 75 millions of income in time of peace. People ex claimed about the American expenditure. A friend told me the other day that the Americans were spending 2,000,000 doll. a day, and asked me what I thought of it. I said I.thought it was rather more ; but having re• gard to the depreciation of American currency and the pre. sent rate of exchange, it was very near the amount which Mr Gladstone, in time of peace, was drawing from our own country —(hear, hear)—and mind you as long as the people of England are apt to think with that comfortable com placency of theirs that they can only go abroad to find ob jects of pity, they will always bo persuaded that they are cleverer, happier, and doing everything better than their fellows. Why is it that the American States have laughed to scorn the prediction of all our acts, magnates, and our writers on finance, who told them that they could not go on with the war fa r six months without coming to Europe for a loan ? How is it that they have deceived and disappointed the whole of Europe? (Hear, hear.) It is because the American people have allowed their Government to make a war expenditure in time of peace. (Cheers.) That is the whole secret. They were spending for the purposes of their Government from £15,000,000 to £17,000,000 ster ling per annum when the war broke out, and the savings then made have enabled them to go through this terrific strain. Take ten millions of savings for forty years, add together ten millions of savings for forty years, with com pound interest, and you will see what a fabulous amount it comes to. This is what America did : but what are you doing here ? You are keeping up a war expenditure in time of peace, and those gentlemen who are so ready to rush into a war would find that we are crippled by our previous ex penditure, I hope that Mr Gladstone will be enabled dur ing the next session to make a large reduction in the actual expenditure. 1 do not want to look at details; and we are told, and we are thereby deceived as to the actual state of things, that so many Excise and Customs duties have been reduced and abolished, but I look at the whole amount, and I find that the Customs and Excise together still amount to about forty millions: sterling, or more than you had to pay before the reductions began. I want to sec bow much the whole income of the tax-payer is reduced, and I hope that during the next session Mr Gladstone will do justice to himself. He has told us that he con siders the expenditure excessive, but it is sailing very near the wind for any Minister after proclaiming that he is spend ing more money than he ought to do. To justify himself it is for you, the people of England, to come forward and pre vent it. (Cheers.) Mr Gladstone is the man who has by his talent and ability enabled the Government to get this money —but I am willing to admit that on account of his services in other respects Blr Gladstone is justified in remaining in the Ministry; but he had nearly finished his career of mani folding the sources of revenue. He has nearly completed his work—any future services that he can render must be in reducing the expenditure. Lord Stanley the other day de clared that he could see his way to an annual expenditure of 60 millions; and I suppose that when Mr Gladstone sees distinguished members of the Opposition making such a statement he will hasten on to that amount for fear he should be taken up by the other side. He has declared the present rate of expenditure to be profligate•—that I think was the term. Mr Disraeli also has talked :about bloated arms• ments, and so we have things all round. I do not know how the public can interfere in Mr Gladstone's budget; but I would advise him to appeal to the people at the next election, and I am inclined to think this is the only way in which they can interfere in the matter with his budget. I bold that the House of Commons is more extravagant than the Government. We have voted upwards of £500,000 .ate - on the army and navy since I have been in the house, WI 1 never saw a single item reduced in that time, but 1 have seen votes drawing in amount. The Government last ses" sion attempted to effect a small saving on the yeorasurh but the country gentlemen came down to the house in body and carried the vote against them. I trust Mr Gla d ; stone will appeal to the British public on the subject a' this expenditure, and it is the only way that can be effeail e : tual at the elections, and lam sure that they will n°t to support him. (Hear.) The House of Commons wants an infusion of the popular element. I see before me so m any °t the middle classes,and beyond them so many cf the operatives, it is thought by some that in the House of Commons the middle-classes predominate, but that is:a great delasionbfer that house is becoming more a rich man's club. Yo u call only have an infusion of the poor man's helmet by the 0 . 11 i: largement of the rights of the people, and I advise the o,l° dle-classes not to regard this as a mere working man's q uer tion. The middle-classes, too, are interested in ha vit , g b: Reform of Parliament, in order that their influence m ay - increased, for now we are but a very small ingredi ent ; deed. (Hear, hear.) A friend the other day said " I e lay a wager that the blacks in America will vote before thi : English working men." I should not like to say that, v „. " this I will say, that you cannot with safety exclude tm: great mass of the people from the suffrage. This qu esti ; was never before in the position in which it now e a° You have had several successive Governments, in Queen Speeches, recommending an increase in the niunh,„ et ,, votes. The people feel that they are trifled with. '", there is nothing which causes such dissatisfaction °lie sense of having been betrayed. The mass of the pe°P le t , i . c . magnanimous and forgiving of everything but the tion sometimes erroneous, of having been betrayed. (gear The working classes are at present silent on the questi °l o l the suffrage, but that is something new, and if they d ° _ . ll , o move, that is an additional reason why the middle should do so. (Cheers.) Circumstances occur once in 0 t 3/ 20 or 30 years when at?. appeal must be made to the Y ll% t mass of the community. Now it is not at all desirable Of, it should leave the whole mass of the people with s ante, a grievance of which they can convict you upo n ie/1 .° • own declarations, (Cheers.) There is danger in s vo in state of things, and the shape which controversy i 8 ;110 is, to my mind, very undesirable. It now takes 0 broad aspect of the question whether the working ni ee ,,,o as a whole shall be enfranchised, or whether they ri s not. It never presented itself in that shape before, f° r the times of the Greeks the working classes were OP; sented is many forms. Do you suppose it prob°.o when the knowledge of the principles of Fnl iti h o economy has elevated the working classes, and 114,' that elevation is continually progressing, that you o sA i r fraanently exclude the whole mass of them from the tre:; chile? It is the interest of the middle classes to eet o be l i solving the problem, and to prevent any danger they to do so without further delay. - The hon. gentleman resumed his seat amidst prol and enthusiastic cheering, The following resolution was then proposed and " unanimously:—" That this meeting having heard the es , nual address of Richard Cobden, Lei , M.P., her obl d presses the heartiest approval of the course he has 1) 01 : 0 0 during the last session of Parliament, again affirsas its fidence in him as their representative, and resolves tosu:' him in future a most cordial and enthusiastic suppot:d The proceedings concluded with the usual vote of to to the chairman. COUNTRY MARKETS. HULL—TUEsDAY. 3 1 se Since our last a moderate business has been ut o i l oi the corn trade, and the transactions reported in whe t ' . ti e that millers confine their operations to immediate re4oo ments. Yorkshire reds, 37s to 43s per qr ; w hites, 3,9 1 42s ; high mixed, 42s ; fine high mixed, 44s ; Bante„V, At our market to-day there was a large supply of 1 1 If wheat, which met a rather slow sale at the prices ° week. Foreign wheat was inactive, at is less monetil Barley prices were is cheaper. Oats, beans, and r tolerable sale, with little change in prices. --- LYNN—TUESDAY. t At our corn market to-day the supply of wb ea o l middling, and sold steadily at about former rateo., b attendance of the trade was good. Barley unaltere 9 in demand and value. Beans and oats rather dull. t oP White wheat 41s to 42s 0000 Barley . 33 0 SO t o Red.. 3Bs to 40s I Grinding ••"'° to Beans .34s to 36s I Oats ..... .218 to 01d... 36s to 38s I Peas MARKET HARBOROUGH—TuEsDAY. Abopi A moderate show of wheat, which sold steadilYl l :ol: recent currencies. Barley in tolerable supply, an is o 1 7:. a shade less money. Other kinds of grain at form —White wheat, 41s to 458; red, 38s to 42s per 3 : to 7 d Malting barley at 31s to 33s per qr.; grinding, 21 p et per 30 st, Oats, old, 26s to 28s; new, 23s to 25° ' st. ; beans, 36s to 42s per qr. DUBLIN—TWESDAY. Sn 'O9 l Thera was a moderate supply of wheat offering , ;0 0 Friday's prices were ma .Itered. Very little doing articles. E. S. d. s. d. 0. d• , Wheat, white.. 22, 0 to 23 6 Oatmeal lO ° 0 to Do., red 2O 0 to 21 6 Do., new Barley Oats Do., black lO 0 to 11 0 Beans.. Bore .• •• • ato Rapeseed 0 tom Bakers' flour 14 0 Indian corn .. 27 0 to CORK-TUESDAY. '~~Rd~ The following were the quotations this reoruqi r ie, wheat, 7s 8d to Ss 31; white, 8s Od to 8s 7d ,101 61 to 7s 3d ; oats, 65 , 1 , 1 to 7s 3d ; black do. ) Gs 31; bere, Od. COAL AlAita ET. Prizes of Coal per Ton at the close of the avO ct. I A. d.! Walls Elld' fL il t Cowpen Hartley 18 91 2 5 1 West Hartley l9 9 Cassop ... • ."0 1 Hartlepool ........ ' • :1 3 , i East Hartlepool."'' - '',' Cyra Garnant Stone' et, 7 ; sold, 6, Walls End. Hot ton 23 0 Ships at mart Foreign Mail Packet List. MAILS DUE. 10' peolg, Australia and Mauritius, via Southampton..... . via Marseilles' ... ig e c o. Brazil and Cape Verde, by British padret. ....... Cape of Good Hope, Ascension, and St. lielena... ne c."4 Chilia, Penang, and Singapore, via Southampton•ac,` via Marseilles • • •'' Falkland Islands Gibraltar, via Southampton 9 ° l'o India (Calcutta), and Ceylon, via Southampton... ga it, via Marseilles.. • India (Bombay), via Southampton ............... via Marseilles ...... ...... Portuga1.... Malta, Egypt, and Aden, via Southampton ...... 10 1 '0 via Marseilles ....... sof' Newfoundland Oporto and Vigo ................. U. S. and British N. America, by Brit. packet...' 0 , by U.S. packet ...• by Canadian packet' . Dec.F W.C. of Africa, Madeira, and Teneriffe ......... West Indies and Pacific ........ Dec' Bahamas (via New York) Bermuda (ditto) Cuba and Mexico• prat a BItEAIPAST BEVERAGE.—Homceopathic a 0 ,, and the medical profession generally, reconnu eli od i e as being the most healthful of all beverages. Wh en .o oo ll trine of homozopathy was first introduced into 90 0 40 1 4 1 there were to be obt tined no preparations of cocoa e: t liqf tractive to the taste or acceptable to the stomach' 011 1 6 ',0 was either supplied in the crude state, or 00 u f /i i,o o oo manufactured as to obtain little notice. .1. Epps, ' 9 : 9 it , Ilomceopathic Chemist, was induced in the year I ° l ede d, his attention to this subject, and at length sucOe t opel the assistance of elaborate machinery, in being o 0 ,0 1 to produce an article pure in its composition, an'" A t P by the perfect trituration it receives in the proce°' Stood' Ag through, as to be most acceptable to the delicat e „, For general use Epps's Cocoa is distinguished a 9 7,0$ rating, grateful breakfast beverage, possessing a & Sad: cious aroma. Dr. II assail, in his work, "F"';ty i r Adulterations," says —" Cocoa contains a great 0 1 1 op portant nutritive principles —every ingredient ttL% - , 10 the growth and sustenance of the body." Ag a oer pi t nutritive, cocoa stands very much hi g h e r than e ft del or tea." Directions—Two t easpoon f u l s o f the Pf breakfast cup, filled up with boiling water or mil'''„'doo' in tin-lined lib., lib., an d 11b . l a b e ll e d pac k e ts, a' grocers, confectioners, and chemists.— [ADTT.7 Births. ro a, iers"t if CRAUFURD.—On the 22d inst., at 89, Belgrave—,c9lloo the wife of Edward J. H. Craufurd, j Auchenames, M.P., of a daughter. he Ce o f T CREW.—On the 23d inst., at Cedar Hous e, ;Ftl'' Stratford, Essex, the wife of J. B. W. COW , ee l daughter. S o gl i WILLIAMS.—On the 21st insf. at Lower T00ti144,0, the wife of Lieut.-Colonel 60 1 '° 80n, Marriages. t reo 0 0 0., BUDDEN—BUDDEN.—On the 22d inst., at S?Thaati°l.0 4 , Hanover-square, James Budden, ASP ti Jane Hannah, youngest daughter of the Ist° Budden, of St. Alban's. be Ore JOYCE—WAKEFORD.—On the 19th inst. t. ° t u t Embassy, Paris, Frederick Joyce, Esq., l V °l % s Essex, to Jane WakefJrd, of the PISC° ceo tt D izi r t. th a s t . 74, Gioucesil : o r li e ' v -de , CLARK.—On the 23d Hyde-park, Edward Clark, ,of the 51"- and of 3, Bartholomew. lane, aged -q 68. sr ° CLARK.—On the 20th inst., at Brook Farm , 31arg 0 41 Essex, Samuel Clark, Esq aged S 3. HEASMAN.—On the 19th inst g at 3, G rallciliell Sarah, wife of Benjamin Heasman• Pl ° RAY.—On the 21st inst., at Newington', '1 Ray, aged 45. witig t°l3' TREWHEELA.—On the 22d inst., at Stoke Ttewheela, Etq., aged 78. pio 1 11 London: Printed and Pchfished by NVILI-0-11nt,co CI No. 112, Strand, Yriater, at Ins Su s t he Strand, in the Preoinot of the SAW.: Q 4l Ali ot akevai, T la ure day, _November 2}, 4'"--